That’s the only one I maybe would understand because of performance/server latency etc.
You are notr referring to Warcraft 3 REFORGED, are you? That game SUCKED upon release. Warcraft 3 REFORGED… More like Warcraft 3 REFUNDED!!! 
You sure about that?
are you finished with your STRAWMAN ARGUMENT?
Could not have said it better myself.
Because it was?
AoE 3 was a COMMERCIAL FAILURE. AoE 3 SOLD approximately 5 MILLION copies (not on steam). And then when released on Steam sold approximately another 5 million copies. AoE 2 SOOLD DOUBLE THAT AMOUNT.
So therefore NEWEER EQUALS BETTER? So does that meant hat Command and Conquer 4 Tiberium Dawn is BETTER than Command and Conquer Generals? Even though Command and Conquer 4 Tiberium Dawn DESTROYED THE COMMAND AND CONQUER FRANCHISE?
NEWER DOES NOT EQUATE TO BETTER. Here is an old adage. “If it hs not broken, do not fix it”. There is also “if it works, it works”.
I am not upset. Though you are technically correct. Though now i understand exactly “what parts” of the game i considered to be “cartoonish”. I previously stated that the game appeared “too cartoonish”, though i was did not have a degree in art/graphic design to explain how/why the game appeared “cartoonish”.
Now i understand. I knew the units appeared to be “cartoonish”, though i could not explain exactly how. The main problem with the game was with the appearance of the “units” and not as much as the environment, and it has A LOT to do with the OVERUSE OF PLAYER COLOURS on the units.
The units all look similar and bland/cartoonish. Mostly because of the overuse of player colours, which not only makes the units all look similar, ot also causes (or at least appears to cause) a DECREASE in the DETAIL of the individial units.
Also, some of the buildings look a bit odd.
I was never talking about c&c 4, I mean from red alert 2 and to generals is a huge improvement… You clearly don’t understand my post
Also when age 3 was release in 2005 there are games like c&c generals, warcraft lll, dawn of war ( the best game ever) there was no chance to age3 vs those monsters when age 2 was release you only have sc… So your point is invalid, age 3 was different but still had the generic gameplay of age2 while we had better RTS with new mechanics, in 2006 coh was released… what I mean is age 2 gameplay is obsolete by 2004 and yet relic still want to bring back the same old gameplay while we already have definitive edition… Many RTS lovers by 2005 where playing warcraft lll and dawn of war again those games with new and different gameplay systems…
2 Likes
I think everyone who is critical of the graphics forgets about the success of games like World of Warcraft. Graphics are cartoony as hell, but that is the very thing that has made it timeless. Give the devs a break. I’m sure they all hear the complaints and will make adjustments as needed.
1 Like
Warcraft have Always been cartoonish. This game was Born with that Graphic style so for the people Is a normale thing.
And i hate WoW: this game ruined Warcraft RTS.
2 Likes
I totally agree with you, but it seems people want the same game all over again even though there already exists DE versions. I share the complaints about the scale problems and some animations that should be polished.
2 Likes
Warcraft is pure fantasy while AoE isn’t. Its more logical that AoE has more like realistic models.
2 Likes
I didn’t say it was good. I’m just saying that their particular art style is the very thing that made the game last as long as it has. If they tried going realistic it would have died long ago. Probably for the better. Relic needs to get their act together with animations and textures for sure, but I don’t think they went in the wrong direction.
In terms of graphics, yes we want sequels to be consistent.
If you want to radically change the style of a game without dealing with backlash, you make a spin off game.
1 Like
In other words, you make a DOW lll
WRONG! How illogical. You are comparing an MMO to an RTS game?
Also, here is some links and words from wikipedia (and other sites) on “Dawn of War 3”.
In February 2018, 10 months after release, a couple of gaming media outlets published that Relic would stop active development of the game.[14][15] Relic developers confirmed these claims shortly after on the same day, while promising to maintain game servers and forums online.[16] Their official statement mentions the game did not meet expectations at launch nor during the course of its life.[citation needed]
Reception[edit source]
Reception
Aggregate score|Aggregator|Score|
| — | — |
|Metacritic|77%|
Review scores Publication Score
Destructoid 7.5/10
Game Informer 7.8/10
GameRevolution 
GameSpot 8/10
IGN 7.6/10
Polygon 8/10
GameSpot awarded Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War III a score of 8.0 out of 10, saying “Dawn of War III builds and maintains an organic tension that yields huge pay-offs, and there’s nothing else quite like it.”[17] Destructoid awarded it 7.5 out of 10, saying “Not everything works (especially the strict adherence to the core concept), but it’s still very much both a Warhammer and a Dawn of War joint.”[18] Hardcore Gamer awarded it 4.5 out of 5, saying “Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War III successfully takes the best elements from the previous two games and blends them with traditional RTS mechanics to create a game with deep strategic gameplay.”[19] IGN scored the game as 7.6/10, noting that “Relic deserves credit for not simply remaking the same game with prettier graphics, but this hybrid approach doesn’t feel as strong as Dawn of War 2’s memorable tactical focus.”[20]
Here are some links of WHAT HAPPENED AFTER RELEASE. 
Relic have abandoned Dawn of War 3 due to poor sales figures
Relic Entertainment have ceased ongoing development on Dawn of War III. In a statement given to Eurogamer. Relic say that the game’s player-base is too small to justify further investment.
Also, Relic abandons Dawn of War 3 as a result of poor sales | VG247
Dawn of War 3 developer Relic is ending support for the game less than a year after its release.
Dawn of War 3, which released in April last year, will not be getting any more content patches or expansions. The game’s developer, Relic, has confirmed that it’s abandoning plans for future content.
The reason being, as you may have guessed, is that Dawn of War 3 just didn’t sell well enough to support any expansions. Relic and publisher Sega confirmed this to Eurogamer in a statement.
“While Dawn of War 3 has a dedicated player base, it didn’t hit the targets we were expecting at launch, and it hasn’t performed the way we had hoped since,” the developer said.
Stat tracker Steam Spy puts Dawn of War 3 at just above 575,000 owners on Steam, and the actual figure is likely lower thanks to a free weekend the game had in October. This is not a big number, and it’s easy to see why Relic made this decision.
2 Likes
I do enjoy the graphic，good job！
The graphics are “okay” as a “standalone game”. However, it is WHETHER OR NOT the game graphics are okay/good as an “Age of Empires SEQUEL”. 
1 Like
Adam answered to many questions from Patreon community and Aoe community too.
He basically said (i Hope to understand well, cause english Is not my language but Adam’s accent It seems very clear) that all these Graphic aspects are still in development and there are discussions into the team. He read what Agecommunity said, its worries and other but he said they are working on those aspects like more polishing, Building sizes etc.
It seems that fan preview video has been recorded months ago and from that video Relic have done different changed like arrows and the bows sizes.
I really appreciate that developers are reading and hearing this community. All of us (i’m the First One) wanna see the return of the RTS King
6 Likes
Could someone write a summary of Adam’s conversation? It would be very appreciate.
Yes it would be nice to have a summary.I am not English so not obvious.And it would be nice to see the improvements. Good news 
I have been following this discussion and it is quite interesting, really. In my personal opinion this is similar to a bad joke - if you need to explain it, it’s just not a good one. And I am seeing a lot of explaining and defending here, as well as statements such as that gameplay is more important than graphics.
Now, of course the latter is true, but we should consider how important Age 4 is. If this really is a full fledged AAA production this game needs an audience much larger than the definitive editions. And this game is supposed to save a whole genre after all. Considering its legacy yes, I believe the graphics are just not enough currently. At the end of the day, lots of people say they are “fine” or “okay” but very few say they are great. If we want to attract a whole new audience, especially of younger players, who did not experience the classic RTS genre in the past 20 years, because it was dead mostly in its classic form, we should really aim for a better presentation than “hmm, it’s okay”.
However, I also feel that some things get mixed up here. Because essentially there are three main points of critizism:
Graphics Fidelity
This mostly fits complaints such as low poly models, blurry textures and general lack of detail. I agree to this complaint and there really is no reason to justify the status quo. Textures could be higher resolution and models should be more detailed. This has no downside whatsoever, because through graphics settings things could be easily downscaled to make the game run on weak hardware.
Would this be a problem on its own? Perhaps not. But it would really help the game to live up to a perceived AAA production value.
Art Style
In my opinion this is a major complaint. I don’t want to speak for everyone so I am being careful using words such a “the majority”, because really, i don’t know. But it feels like a huge part of the fan base does not like the art style at all. I am one of them. I don’t like the pastel colors, I don’t like how muddy and brown everything looks, how soft and blurry and how bright and toy like the units look. I don’t find it inviting and it doesn’t remind me of past Age games.
The art style breaks with past games the most. And because it does not fit with the rest of the series so much, it feels generic. So while I know I am looking at Age, if I didn’t, it might as well have been any other generic RTS set in a similar time period and this bothers me a lot. It just doen’t feel right.
I know there are people who like this style. I believe it caters towards the competitive audience that cares about readability and whatnot a lot. I really think Relic went a bit overboard here leaving a large portion of the fan base that just wants a nice and friendly experience behind. I’ve written in the other thread about proportions that to me this feels like a decision made deliberately for reasons such as how to make the game more readable when watching streams and competions.
The dev team says they have so much respect for the series, which is probably true, as they are mostly sticking to what defined the series gameplay wise, but I fear they completely left Shelley’s vision regarding the presentation behind in favor of optimization for competitive play. IMHO this should be part of an accessibility or competitive match setting over the game’s general presentation.
Proportions
I don’t understand what has happened here, either. Proportions between units and buildings have been better in older footage. Now they are so out of line that it really breaks immersion for me. I believe the reasoning goes hand in hand with art style choices. This again goes against the Age 2 style, which had the best (read most realistic) proportions between units and buildings of the series. Considering it was also the most popular title of them all, I’d have expected them to go with something similar.
Issues with Mechanics
Mechanical issues, such as instant turning of units, pathing issues, models ignoring terrain and such, which make the game look dated.
I believe that mechanical issues would probably take the most time to fix or rework. All other issues brought up here, such as unit scaling, polygon count on models or even art style to the extent of color scheme should be more or less “simple” to fix. Question is, whether they want to or not. I’m sure they have heard the feedback.
What I was trying to say, before my post became rather long, is that we shouldn’t dismiss criticism about graphics as easily as some do in this thread. Everyone has their own view on things and most feedback is constructive, whether they want the game to look a little less like a title from 10 years ago or whether they don’t like the direction the general presentation and art priorities are going. We all want the game to be successful and last us another 20 years and do better than “okay”.
9 Likes
A very good post, very well explained.These were also my argumentations: that’s the reason why i made this thread and i wanna be honest with you: i didn’t Believe to see all those opinions so pretty similar to my point of view. This Means that Graphic worries were true.
From Xboxera Podcast Adam Isgreen said there Will be some changed. We’ll see what and how.
It’s sad that the units look cartoony. I don’t want to be playing a game that looks like to be coming from the Google Play Store.
Could we have a realism rework ?
I appreciate that the devs wanted readability above all else, but maybe that does not mean plastic-looking models?
1 Like